From: Jawed Karim <jawed AT tc DOT umn DOT edu>
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: "Are Allegro's routines fast enough to write Quake-like games?" - No.
Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 16:27:26 -0600
Organization: University of Minnesota
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <338A0E4E.5540@tc.umn.edu>
References: <199705232152 DOT QAA08574 AT rrnet DOT com>
Reply-To: jawed AT tc DOT umn DOT edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: pub-16-b-20.dialup.umn.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Precedence: bulk

El Guapo Grande del Fuego wrote:
> 
> I'm sorry, but I'd have to say no on this one...  Allegro has rather slow
> 3D routines if you ask me...  Now, if you look at something like Plush3D
> by Justin Frankel (http://nullsoft.home.ml.org), that'd probably be fast
> enough.
> 
> Allegro's routines are decent, but they definitely need optimization...  When
> you look at the 3D routines, they're all in C, probably not a good thing :)
> 
> atomly

I'd have to say that Allegro is quite decent, but not the best in speed.
No offense, but Allegro's 3d capabilities are a little disappointing.
Plush is definitely far better for 3D. Plush by the way is also all in
C, that doesn't mean it's slow though.